These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

can someone explain the appeal of "the matrix"
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Derrick Miles
Death Rabbit Ky Oneida
#21 - 2014-08-04 02:03:18 UTC
It is a movie about the subjectivity of reality, the cruel, unfeeling nature of our existence, and the human drive to overcome these obstacles and limitations and succeed and progress in ways we cannot imagine. It questions the nature of humanity and it's definition, the importance of a will to thrive and succeed or to merely survive, and whether our creations are what actually define our own abilities.

Translation: It has cool fight scenes.
Adunh Slavy
#22 - 2014-08-04 05:03:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Adunh Slavy
Philosophically the Matrix fills the need for explanation; for that feeling that something is very wrong with the world. Its shallow characters and simple plot line make it accessible to a large number of people - a triumph of vulgarity, with a contemporary wrapper.

Forces larger than you control the world, but if one has the ability to see beyond those forces, then self actualization is within reach.

This theme is common and can be found in literature from ancient Hindu texts, through the old and new testaments, up through current political conspiracy thrillers.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#23 - 2014-08-04 07:46:45 UTC
This is like asking why Jurassic Park was such a massive thing (again, there was only one movie those others dont count)
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#24 - 2014-08-04 08:35:18 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
This is like asking why Jurassic Park was such a massive thing (again, there was only one movie those others dont count)


I really wish you could have said that 2 months earlier.
When I realized that I had never seen part 2 and 3, I decided to buy the ultimate Jurassic Park Collectors edition with all three parts.
I am still perplexed and trying to wrap my head around what the hell I was watching.
I mean, even if every dinosaur was digitally replaced by Jar Jar Binks, those movies would actually still have been better than that turbo-crap.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#25 - 2014-08-04 09:04:23 UTC
Nathaniel Raynaud wrote:
so, i just got around to watching "the matrix", and came away thinking that it was an okay film but not understanding why so many people are so into it.

like a lot of science fiction, it starts off with a premise which doesn't act as a platform to facilitate character interaction or examine aspects of humanity but rather just kind of exists. "everything you believe is actually fake" is a fine premise, it worked for "inception", but whereas "inception" faded out of relevance about a year after it was released, the matrix has somehow remained a big cultural influence while being a sequence of slow-motion kung fu action clips interspersed with scenes of character interaction completely lacking in personality and some really mystifying wardrobe design choices.

even lighthearted modern science fiction films like "snow piercer" come out ahead compared to "the matrix". the former concerns itself entirely with human interaction instead of its science fiction premise, and the result is a really fun and watchable film with an interesting cast and good looking guys doing violent things (you should watch it, btw). meanwhile, "the matrix" fails to develop most of its characters beyond basic archetypes and all the action scenes kind of blend together after a while.

anyway, why do people like it so much

Do not try to understand why "the matrix" was hailed by people as the messiah of the cyberpunk movie genre because that is impossible. Instead realize the truth, there are no people!

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#26 - 2014-08-04 09:42:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Debora Tsung
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
This is like asking why Jurassic Park was such a massive thing (again, there was only one movie those others dont count)


I really wish you could have said that 2 months earlier.
When I realized that I had never seen part 2 and 3, I decided to buy the ultimate Jurassic Park Collectors edition with all three parts.
I am still perplexed and trying to wrap my head around what the hell I was watching.
I mean, even if every dinosaur was digitally replaced by Jar Jar Binks, those movies would actually still have been better than that turbo-crap.

Well, tbh, i liked the T-Rex in new York part, other than that I can't remember what happened in the 2nd and 3rd movie... It's weird, i know I saw those movies but it's almost like some weird dream about dinosaurs that faded away and there's only a few pictures in my head, not even sound or movement... Straight

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#27 - 2014-08-04 10:07:00 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:
I liked the second one a little bit. Is that bad?

Well, I'll admit to liking all three, so liking the second a little bit is probably good by comparison.

I've never been a huge movie fan, so I can probably list quite easily the movies I'd watch over and over:

The Crow
Highlander (only the first. Dated now)
Bourne series
Matrix series
Original Star Wars trilogy
Mad Max (original only)
Romper Stomper
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
A Good Year (I can't explain this one. Totally not like the rest)
Derrick Miles
Death Rabbit Ky Oneida
#28 - 2014-08-04 11:24:59 UTC
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
This is like asking why Jurassic Park was such a massive thing (again, there was only one movie those others dont count)


I really wish you could have said that 2 months earlier.
When I realized that I had never seen part 2 and 3, I decided to buy the ultimate Jurassic Park Collectors edition with all three parts.
I am still perplexed and trying to wrap my head around what the hell I was watching.
I mean, even if every dinosaur was digitally replaced by Jar Jar Binks, those movies would actually still have been better than that turbo-crap.

Ouch on the collector's edition. But I think Jar Jar Binks was worse than part 2 and 3 combined.
Nathaniel Raynaud
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2014-08-04 13:01:06 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Alice Saki wrote:
Also there is only one movie... THERE WERE NO SEQUELS.EvilRoll
QFT

The same goes for Star Wars, anything after Return of the Jedi is heresy.

when i was a lil kid, my dad let me watch the original trilogy and then strictly forbade me from seeing the prequels. i assumed that they were full of violence and gore and all that good stuff and was viciously envious when my friends got to go see episode 3 when it was released. then i watched them when i was around 11 and realized that he was trying to protect me

Adunh Slavy wrote:
Philosophically the Matrix fills the need for explanation; for that feeling that something is very wrong with the world. Its shallow characters and simple plot line make it accessible to a large number of people - a triumph of vulgarity, with a contemporary wrapper.

Forces larger than you control the world, but if one has the ability to see beyond those forces, then self actualization is within reach.

This theme is common and can be found in literature from ancient Hindu texts, through the old and new testaments, up through current political conspiracy thrillers.

i guess i can see the matrix having a quasi-religious appeal; maybe the gun-fu and easy-to-follow plot are the equivalent of distilling buddhism down into the four noble truths in terms of accessibility? it evidently had religious appeal to some people (although it seems to be more about nerds trying to find excuses to drop acid)
Handar Turiant
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2014-08-04 15:11:28 UTC
Nathaniel Raynaud wrote:
so, i just got around to watching "the matrix", and came away thinking that it was an okay film but not understanding why so many people are so into it.

like a lot of science fiction, it starts off with a premise which doesn't act as a platform to facilitate character interaction or examine aspects of humanity but rather just kind of exists. "everything you believe is actually fake" is a fine premise, it worked for "inception", but whereas "inception" faded out of relevance about a year after it was released, the matrix has somehow remained a big cultural influence while being a sequence of slow-motion kung fu action clips interspersed with scenes of character interaction completely lacking in personality and some really mystifying wardrobe design choices.

even lighthearted modern science fiction films like "snow piercer" come out ahead compared to "the matrix". the former concerns itself entirely with human interaction instead of its science fiction premise, and the result is a really fun and watchable film with an interesting cast and good looking guys doing violent things (you should watch it, btw). meanwhile, "the matrix" fails to develop most of its characters beyond basic archetypes and all the action scenes kind of blend together after a while.

anyway, why do people like it so much


Believe you're trolling. The movie is 15 years old. Still must respond.

It very much ties into aspects of humanity, solipsism for one (as explained by someone else). Additionally the technological age we have created impacting on every aspect of our lives. It also ties in to wondrous conspiracy theory feelings everyone had at the end of the 20th century. Y2K, blablabla. You know what else came out that year? Jar Jar Binks. The Matrix captured a subculture zeitgeist very effectively. Popularising cyberpunk, as someone else stated.

The movie was also highly effectively marketed. I can recall not wanting to see any spoilers about it, the whole What Is The Matrix campaign. Being totally blown away when I first saw it.

It delves into what constitues a consciousness, what is love, etc. There are many tie ins to religious doctrine, etc. etc. It's almost a modern allegory to all monotheistic religions (i.e. most of the world).

Also, and please forgive me the ad hominem here, but even your avatar looks like a snooty hipster goatee sporting film critic (the lock of hair is a dead giveaway). Hence trolling.

Finally, I'd state that defining quality in terms of human interaction only is a way to limit your appreciation of film. There are many works of film that stand on their own purely as technological works in addition to their story/script/writing. Even Avatar was a marvel of tech when it was released. To date, the only film I've ever seen where 3D actually added anything to the experience. Never mind the cookie cutter writing. There are movies that define a subculture, or a certain time in our history very eloquently. None of these have anything to do specificaly with human interaction.

Do yourself a favour and also go watch the Second Renaissance part 1 and 2. They are 'Cartoons' by the way. Shocking, I know.
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#31 - 2014-08-04 15:20:58 UTC
Brujo Loco wrote:
I always enjoy watching the background over the main focus of most situations, personal quirk, and what grabbed me from the movie after the FX is what grabs me from movies like "Forbidden Planet" for example... The attention to details: you remember in "Forbidden Planet" the part where they finally land on the planet and they discover its a huge battery of sorts and there´s a nice handpainted still of a sci-fi futuristic building? That scene is burned in my head. i highly enjoy old Sci-fi movies when they actually cared to add these touches of "Art".


You are not alone, My favorite is this representation of underground city in XXI century - its from 1936 film, "Things to come".

As art is a major part of any film, I sometimes don't care about the scripts if the single picture makes it more telling than thousand words.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Handar Turiant
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2014-08-04 15:31:07 UTC
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Philosophically the Matrix fills the need for explanation; for that feeling that something is very wrong with the world. Its shallow characters and simple plot line make it accessible to a large number of people - a triumph of vulgarity, with a contemporary wrapper.

Forces larger than you control the world, but if one has the ability to see beyond those forces, then self actualization is within reach.

This theme is common and can be found in literature from ancient Hindu texts, through the old and new testaments, up through current political conspiracy thrillers.


Very true, but I'd hardly call the trilogy vulgar. Compared to 99% of Hollywood output it's everything but vulgar.
Nathaniel Raynaud
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2014-08-04 16:07:26 UTC
Handar Turiant wrote:

It very much ties into aspects of humanity, solipsism for one (as explained by someone else). Additionally the technological age we have created impacting on every aspect of our lives. It also ties in to wondrous conspiracy theory feelings everyone had at the end of the 20th century. Y2K, blablabla. You know what else came out that year? Jar Jar Binks. The Matrix captured a subculture zeitgeist very effectively. Popularising cyberpunk, as someone else stated.

it has value as a piece of media that expressed the fears and thoughts of its time, but a lot of that value is lost when watched in the context of modern day by someone who didn't get a chance to absorb the gestalt of the late 19th-early 21th century due to being a literal infant at the time. it seems that most people that appreciate it appreciate it as it was when they first saw it because they are nostalgic science fiction dads, but its power as a period-defining work is limited by the fact that it lacks more than entry-level period-trancending insight.

Handar Turiant wrote:
Also, and please forgive me the ad hominem here, but even your avatar looks like a snooty hipster goatee sporting film critic (the lock of hair is a dead giveaway). Hence trolling.

i was going for "chronic depression chic" but "snooty hipster film critic" is also a good aesthetic

Handar Turiant wrote:
Finally, I'd state that defining quality in terms of human interaction only is a way to limit your appreciation of film. There are many works of film that stand on their own purely as technological works in addition to their story/script/writing.

that early 2000s cgi film about dinosaurs also pioneered a lot of new frontiers in animation, but at the end of the day it was still a film that you put on to amuse kids that you're looking after so that they'll leave you alone for a few hours. though there are films that can be appreciated for a single aspect of their production, they aren't usually acknowledged as classic, well-rounded films and i doubt anyone will care about avatar in fifteen years like people care about the matrix.

Handar Turiant wrote:
Do yourself a favour and also go watch the Second Renaissance part 1 and 2. They are 'Cartoons' by the way. Shocking, I know.


that is some very good looking animation
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#34 - 2014-08-04 17:16:57 UTC
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#35 - 2014-08-04 19:13:41 UTC
Just imagine for a moment what the world was like in 1999. The internet was this brand new thing where you could send mails, download a single music file in 10min and then go offline again because someone else needed the phone line. The computer was basically a replacement for the typewriter for most people.

Of course many saw the potential of this machines and wrote about it, I mean that happened even before that time. There was a lot of science fiction literature who talked abut immersive virtual reality and the cyberspace. An there where are also the philosophers who probably talked about it centuries before in some form. But only a small part of the people are interested in science fiction books, cyberpunk (oh this weekends full of Shadowrun games where you played the game in your head, I miss them :-) ) or philosophy.

Then "The Matrix" came. I had actually read a lot of science fiction, including Neuromancer etc. but I was extremely surprised by the movie. The idea that the reality, our reality you take for granted may be just an illusion, a machine generated simulation and your mind was trapped inside was completely new to me and probably most of the people who watched the film.

After the movie we left the cinema and we where changed people. It made us wonder about our reality, is it real or is it just an illusion? How do you even define reality? My mind was blown.

I can understand that with todays technology and examples of immersive simulations the point they tried to make is more than obvious. But the question still remains, and if that movie did not spark the curiosity in you about the nature of our reality then you probably missed the whole point of it.

P.S. My memories may be colored by the usual biases and past drug excesses

Evil RatKid
Nathaniel Raynaud
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2014-08-04 19:51:01 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
But the question still remains, and if that movie did not spark the curiosity in you about the nature of our reality then you probably missed the whole point of it.

to be fair, i was an unusually paranoid little kid, so metaphysical crises and questioning reality have been my specialties since elementary school. one time i spent a week obsessing over the idea that it was entirely possible that nothing was objectively real, which was a common delusion for me but for some reason i could't stop thinking about it that time even though i was profoundly distressed by it so i ended up googling the concept. then i read thu the wikipedia page on "solipsism", thought "ok, if someone was trying to keep me submerged in simulated reality they definitely wouldn't have made it so easy for me to access this", but then i of course started fixating on the idea that it was a test by the simulator(s) and started scanning the page for coded messages for at least half an hour before my mom told me to get off the computer and go outside or something

anyway, i kind of assumed that that was a shared childhood experience and that most people wouldn't be that surprised by the matrix
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#37 - 2014-08-04 19:55:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmy Zeta
Derrick Miles wrote:
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
This is like asking why Jurassic Park was such a massive thing (again, there was only one movie those others dont count)


I really wish you could have said that 2 months earlier.
When I realized that I had never seen part 2 and 3, I decided to buy the ultimate Jurassic Park Collectors edition with all three parts.
I am still perplexed and trying to wrap my head around what the hell I was watching.
I mean, even if every dinosaur was digitally replaced by Jar Jar Binks, those movies would actually still have been better than that turbo-crap.

Ouch on the collector's edition. But I think Jar Jar Binks was worse than part 2 and 3 combined.


Oh no, you don't think that.
I don't believe you.
Just imagine..a desolate island filled with bioengineered Jar Jar Binks clones. And an American family trapped on the island- their only way out is to fight through endless hordes of Jar Jars. And all they have is lawnmowers, a couple of chainsaws, machetes and several assault rifles.
Don't tell me you wouldn't watch that. Don't tell me you wouldn't love it.
I would kickstart the hell out of it if somebody wanted to make that movie.,

on topic:

Few people seem to know that the original concept of MAtrix was a little different than what we got in the movies:

Quote:
In The Matrix the robots use humans as batteries! (And recycle the dead into nutrient solution to help feed the living).

This would have been Did Not Do the Research if it wasn't that it is all Executive Meddling. The original story had the brains of the humans being used as part of a neural network for additional computing power. But the suits thought that was too hard for people to understand. So instead we get them as batteries, which is Artistic License - Physics.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#38 - 2014-08-04 20:07:41 UTC
Darkness is the ultimate question. What is nothing, what is deep in the reality, is everything just an oscilation of pure nothingness? The hollow ground of true death, the ultimate dead god of yours, everything being a sound of silence, meaning nothing to anyone, to itself, to the ripple on the black as iced light lake. Dreaming the dream of you, that is everything it can do.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#39 - 2014-08-04 20:41:09 UTC
Nathaniel Raynaud wrote:
... so i ended up googling the concept. then i read thu the wikipedia page on "solipsism" ...

Ok I see what you mean and I apologize for my previous comment, I admire your curiosity about the subject.

The part I quoted from your post is in my opinion where the whole difference is between your childhood and the time "The Matrix" was released. There was no Google and now Wikipedia. Of course that knowledge was around then, but it was hidden under unknown subjects in unknown bookshelfs because you have to connect a lot of dots until you even arrive in the category you are looking for to read about such concepts. You had to do a lot of digging to arrive at the information you get today in a few minutes with a few search terms as starting point. The whole interconnection in todays sources of information is actually the whole secret about why you are even able to find it.

I mean I learned about this concepts probably from the same sources you did, but that was long after "The Matrix" and certainly long after my childhood. Big smile

We often forget how our access to information has been fundamentally changed in the last few years. The Wikipedia is now ~13 years old and when it started almost all the people I know predicted that such a thing would never work, that a wiki with free access would only be vandalized and no one would fill it with information just for free. The whole concept of self organisation in such projects was a completely irrational and impossible thing in the minds of a lot of people.

maybe this has even changed the perception of some people about humanity itself. It shows that most people are actually good people with a few exceptions and not the other way around.

Sorry for getting a bit off topic

Evil RatKid
Nathaniel Raynaud
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2014-08-04 21:24:35 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:

Sorry for getting a bit off topic

don't worry about it, your comparisons of media and technology then vs now have been p insightful so far and relevant to understanding the appeal of the matrix

anyway i feel weird writing about childhood psychosis on the internet so enjoy this exquisite example of how the cyberpunk elements made mainstream by the matrix helped inspire great works of film